Monday, July 26, 2010

Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina: California is not a Swap Meet.

Anyone who is an American Citizen understands and values the membership of an elite club. In 1985 when I became an American Citizen, I registered to vote. Since then, I enjoy the privilege of voting in every election. Therefore, it is hard to accept that Meg Whitman could not find the time to vote until she was in her forties. Now after years of working in the private sector, Ms. Whitman is suddenly ready to participate in America’s great democracy. Why should the voters of California take her seriously, or forgive her selfishness?

For the last year, she has disparaged everyone whom she considers her rival for the governorship of California. Her insidious ads flood the airways. She touts her experience as the CEO of EBay; however, that does not equip her with the qualifications to run the state of California. Arnold Schwarzenegger (the Austrian actor?) became governor of California without any qualification or experience. He is leaving the State on the brink of economic collapse. California does not need another trial by error governor. Whitman, with her limitless funds, believes she can simply buy the governorship of California.

Similarly, Carly Fiorina is proud of her leadership of AT&T, Lucent and Hewlett-Packard (I do believe that some of the former employees of those companies would beg to differ). She did not perform too well in John McCain’s campaign for president, and when she thought she was out of the earshot of the public, she criticized Barbara Boxer’s hair. Fiorina has no credible record of accomplishment in the private sector.

In my opinion, people who run for government offices should start at the grass roots. Whitman and Fiorina should start by building their base at the community level. People are not widgets, and California is not a giant Swap Meet. As Californians, we deserve better. The present governor thought he could govern California by osmosis. What a gigantic disappointment. Whitman and Fiorina should stick to what they know best: how to manipulate corporate spreadsheets.

© 2010 Mouth Wired Shut

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Should our Nation’s Leaders Hold Office Indefinitely?

A few weeks ago, I was watching MSNBC and Chris Matthews said something we all think, but are too frightened to say.  He posed the question, “What age should senators retire?” The United States Congress needs to clean house.  Their age for retirement should be the same as the public.

The United States Congress is like a “Retirement Commune” for a majority of overpaid rich white dudes and a few privileged black ones.  The Senators and Representatives bumble around from session to session without accomplishing anything of substance. Some Senators nap on camera while in committee meetings.  Their electorates who anoint them with the privilege of occupying the highest office of the nation are disillusioned.  What other profession has senility as one of its outstanding attributes?

It is upsetting to have men and women in Congress well past their prime pretending to be working on behalf of the people.  The following Senators are prime examples: Strom Thurmond almost died in office at approximately 100 years.  Senator Jessie Helms probably had some form of brain damage.  Senator Robert Byrd, even though he suffered the after-effects of a stroke, held onto his seat until his death a few weeks ago.

U.S Senator Arlen Specter is another great example of someone who does not know when to exit gracefully. At almost eighty years old, his legacy would be more distinguished, if he held court and offered his insight and wisdom to up-and-coming, would-be, young senators. In my opinion, no Senator should serve beyond seventy-five years old.  But I guess the Senators will never pass a law to put themselves out of such a lucrative position.

© 2010 Mouth Wired Shut